Although this is a China-US film forum, in the end it inevitably evolved into a Chinese film forum. Duke sat steadily here, carefully listening to the speeches of top figures in the Chinese film industry, which also served as a thorough understanding of the Chinese film market.
In the discussions, the low quality of Chinese films was often attributed to directors.
Since Chinese films entered a commercialized model, they have basically implemented a director-centered system imported from Hong Kong, rather than the producer-centered system popular in Hollywood. Currently, the trend in China is to display "A film by so-and-so director" at the beginning or end of the credits, giving the impression that apart from the director, everything else is insignificant.
Regardless of the film's quality, most directors will solemnly declare in interviews that they poured their heart and soul into the work, that they loved the script, and that the production was full of sincerity.
Corresponding to this "show of effort" is that these directors almost without exception will also complain about harsh filming conditions, dangerous stunts for actors… But for audiences, hardship and danger can hardly justify tolerating an incoherent film.
After this "self-sacrifice tactic" could no longer continue, many bad-film directors began to complain. One of the most classic complaints is that directors privately shift responsibility onto actors—for example, complaints about actors' fees. At the end of last year, news spread that a certain actress demanded 10 million RMB per film, scaring off many who wanted to cast her.
One director privately complained that he had originally wanted to hire a certain big-name star, but the high fee consumed a large portion of the production budget, leaving insufficient funds for other areas, resulting in some planned special effects and sets being unachievable. Naturally, the film's quality could not be high.
Recently, "high fees" have become a widely criticized phenomenon, prompting many actors to respond that this is a "market behavior": "Even pork prices can rise, so why can't actors' fees? High fees are due to market demand."
Actors' complaints are certainly reasonable. Certain star actors and directors, due to accumulated reputations from previous films, guarantee box office appeal. Some young idols, due to their massive fanbases, are envied by many production companies.
Besides shifting responsibility to actors, many directors habitually blame screenwriters. Many directors claim that there are no good screenwriters in China. The few remaining competent writers charge too much and deliver scripts hastily, with dialogues hardly polished.
Some directors analyze that China's commercial film wave only began in the early 21st century. Over the past decade or so, the older generation of screenwriters can no longer meet current commercial needs, and the younger generation has no idea how to structure dramatic conflicts. The resulting scripts are essentially nonsense, forcing directors to redo them. Yet very few directors have formal literary training, so many details in the stories are criticized.
From the screenwriters' perspective, directors' claims are simply unreasonable.
Wang Xingdong, president of the China Film Literature Society, repeatedly emphasized the importance of protecting screenwriters' rights. He believes that because directors constantly revise screenwriters' scripts, many excellent stories are ruined. In many films, including his own, directors altered plots without the screenwriters' consent, losing meaningful content and even harming the scripts themselves.
Wang Xingdong also complained that screenwriters' fees are already the lowest in film production.
"For a film with an investment of tens of millions, the screenwriter might only get two or three hundred thousand RMB, which is already high. Compared to actors' or directors' fees, this is almost a trivial amount, even less than the cost of holding a press conference. Yet many crews still owe screenwriters money."
He almost stood up to appeal to producers, "This phenomenon is common in the industry. Which screenwriter hasn't had cases of unpaid fees? So Chinese films are poor not because screenwriters are incompetent or charge too much, but because the whole industry doesn't respect their work, leading to a lack of motivation."
No problem is caused by one side alone. Duke had struggled in this country's film industry and, for several years, had been closely following the Chinese market and collecting related information, gaining some understanding of many situations.
Another explanation for low Chinese film quality is that the current Chinese film environment is very favorable, attracting a lot of speculative capital into film investment. Most of this hot money comes from an "investment" perspective, pursuing short-term profit.
Given the current state of Chinese films, a film usually takes about six months to a year from start to completion. If no sets are needed for early preparation, it only takes a few dozen days from script acquisition to project approval. Post-production by the director and review by the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television generally take about four months.
After release, films are usually withdrawn within a month. So if targeting only the domestic market, not involving overseas sales, and the box office is decent, investors can recoup funds in at most a year and a half.
From this schedule, creators have little time; producing a high-quality film in such a short period is almost impossible.
Yet many private investors justify this "short and fast" profit-making method: "We invest to earn returns. High-quality films are for artists. Whether the audience likes it is the director's concern. As businessmen, making money is enough."
From the past two years' Chinese bad-film types, most concentrate on thriller, romance, and comedy, because market research shows these three categories have the lowest production costs and the easiest potential for box office returns.
Like Hollywood, thriller films generally require low investment. An industry saying once circulated: thrillers don't lose money.
Romances are similar. As long as the right idol actors are cast and promotion is done, even remakes of Korean dramas can attract many young female fans. Comedies require careful timing; Hong Kong directors like Wong Pak-ming, despite constant criticism for each comedy, rarely lose money because they release during the Lunar New Year period.
It is precisely because such low-cost, low-tier films can still make money that many domestic investors have gradually lowered their standards for Chinese commercial films. After all, commercial investment carries risk. Rather than spending large sums and high costs to produce a meticulously crafted commercial blockbuster, it is more profitable to spend less on a low-quality film. Even if the content is poor, it can still make money.
The most prominent counterexample in this regard is Zhang Guoshi's The Flowers of War. Rumor has it that his investors parted ways with him because the film indeed cost hundreds of millions to produce, yet its final box office performance was a total failure. Business-minded investors could not accept this and began considering a lower-risk approach.
It is natural for businessmen to pursue profit, but this investment mindset inevitably has some negative impact on the development of Chinese cinema. Everyone knows that if Chinese films want to truly enter the global market, thrillers, romance, and comedies will not achieve much.
This mindset has already begun to affect the diversification of Chinese cinema. The most typical example is that China has basically never produced authentic science fiction films. Looking at Hollywood films that circulate worldwide, at least half contain clear science fiction concepts or features.
The absence of globally circulated sci-fi films is not only due to the lack of scientific and technical literacy among directors, but most importantly because investors are unwilling to take such risks.
Sci-fi films require extensive special effects and post-production time. Two to three years later, it is also impossible to predict the competitors during the same release period. Moreover, computer-generated effects, in any case, truly follow the principle of "you get what you pay for." Trying to cut costs will only produce "cheap" effects, making high-quality visual effects impossible.
"Watching planes fly overhead every day, yet never having flown—this is the state of Chinese cinema."
Jiang Xiaojun's words are undoubtedly representative: "Our technical awareness is limited to the ground. It's not that we don't want to fly. First, we lack technology; second, we lack the concept; third, we lack money. Missing any one of these, we simply cannot fly!"
Although these statements are somewhat exaggerated, they are not without reason. If Chinese cinema wants to truly reach the world, it cannot rely on effort in a single area, nor can a few Hollywood-style scripts solve the problem.
As Duke said, Hollywood films dominate worldwide not because of the scripts, nor due to creativity and innovation alone. It is a comprehensive, all-encompassing phenomenon.
Later, the discussion turned to Duke, and he opportunely said a few words: "I am just a director and can only see things from a director's perspective. In my view, many newly risen commercial directors in your country should avoid picking up some bad habits…"
There are some things Duke cannot discuss too deeply, otherwise, as an outsider, he would inevitably be seen as provoking trouble.
In his view, many of the bad habits of China's low-quality film directors are actually influenced by some Hong Kong directors.
...
Hi For access to additional chapters of
Director in Hollywood (40 chpaters)
Made In Hollywood (60 Chapters)
Pokemon:Bounty Hunter(30 Chapters)
Douluo Dalu: Reincarnated as Yan(40 Chapters)
Hollywood:From Razzie to Legend(40 Chapters)
The Great Ruler (30 Chapters)
Join pateron.com/Translaterappu